Hi,
(CCeding sioc-dev mailing lists)
On 20 July 2012 14:30, nil <nil.niklas@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok, so if I understand correctly, the #MailMessage doesn't have any
> additional properties, so by using purely the SIOC types I would lose
> some information from the headers.
Take into account that SIOC is about social communication, not files.
Therefore the semantics of those low-level properties are not really
useful at that abstraction level, but actually used for creating some
others more interesting for the social interaction. The business is
different, just that.
> Some of the linking information
> (References, In-Reply-To -> Message-Id) could be retained by creating
> #Container objects. But that would require the converting system to
> have access to all previously received messages.
For instance, that raw data is retained as the sioc:has_reply
property: http://rdfs.org/sioc/spec/#term_has_reply
Even you can get some upper level semantics of that data, as form of
sioc:next_by_date and so on.
See an output example:
http://swaml.berlios.de/demos/sioc-dev/2007-May/post-641.rdf
> So right now I like the Nepomuk approach better, to have a class per
> header plus a generic MessageHeader class for additional headers.
> How are such situations usually resolved? There now seem to be two
> classes (sioc:MailMessage, nmo:Message) that both have the same
> purpose. Is there a way to "combine" them, so that software
> understanding one, but not the other can take the information it
> understands and ignore the rest?
There are two classes, right, but their semantics are different. On
the one hand you have sioct:MailMessage (or even sioc:Post) which
refers to the email message as, let's say, can be viewed as an email
in a mail client. On the other hand nmo:Message models the basic raw
data described by RFC4155 (headers and so on). Obviously both classes
can be combined depending of what you need.
> My brain hasn't fully adapted to RDF yet, I'm shooting a bit in the dark here :)
One basic rule if you come from programming: a RDFS/OWL class doesn't
represent the same than in Object-Oriented Programming does.
Cheers,
>
> -- Niklas
>
> On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 1:50 PM, Sergio Fernández <sergio@wikier.org> wrote:
>> Hi Stéphane,
>>
>> exactly, a few years ago in SIOC we worked on many types of social
>> online communities, and mailing lists were of those. SWAML was the
>> software artifact developed.
>>
>> So you can find two useful classes:
>>
>> - with http://rdfs.org/sioc/ns#Post fits with any post message, blog,
>> microblogging, mail, etc
>>
>> - but we also included the subclass
>> http://rdfs.org/sioc/types#MailMessage for particular usages
>>
>> If you'd have any question, please don hesitate to ask me.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> On 19 July 2012 18:08, Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Nil,
>>>
>>> I'd encourage you to check out http://swaml.berlios.de/ and see what RDF
>>> model they use to convert mailing list to RDF (looks like SIOC is involved).
>>> I'm cc'ing Sergio who is involved in this project.
>>>
>>> Steph.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 7:22 AM, nil <nil.niklas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>> Is there already an established way to represent email messages in
>>>> JSON-LD? I found RFC822 in RDF[1], but it seems abandoned. On the
>>>> public-rww list, people mentioned "RESTful mail over TLS" a couple of
>>>> times, which may be a usecase for such a representation. If I wanted
>>>> to use that RFC822 in RDF, what @type would I set? The examples there
>>>> use http://www.example.org/rfc822# as namespace, which is probably not
>>>> meant to be final.
>>>>
>>>> -- Niklas Cathor
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/HTTP/WD-RFC822-in-RDF-20060502
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Sergio Fernández <sergio@wikier.org>
--
Sergio Fernández <sergio@wikier.org>